Detailed Research on Wilderness Studies

The role of therapy through exposure to wilderness settings is not a new idea. The original blue print for modern day therapy programmes, based on non- clinical environments, originated as a process of serendipity dating back to the early months of the 20th Century.

A relatively recent publication by Bryant Williams (2000), examining efficacy studies of this nature, describes how such interventions began. Seemingly, in June 1901, the New York asylum was suffering badly from overcrowding and as a result 40 psychiatric patients with Tuberculosis were moved into tents onto the lawn to prevent an epidemic in the hospital. (See Caplan 1974, cited in Williams, B. 2000).

Sudden unexpected benefits within the tent living group began to surface as a result of the change in their environment. Many previously bed ridden patients "began to show substantial improvement in physical, mental and behavioural health and were eventually discharged" (Caplan, 1974).

A further event a few years later, also contributed to the early evidence base for this therapeutic effect. Again in America, this time San Francisco where in 1906, an earthquake "destroyed much of the Agnew Asylum, leaving many patients trapped and others without shelter forcing them to construct tents and begin living outdoors" (Caplan, 1974).

A written observation by the hospital's Dr Hoishol describes how patients "worked like Trojans to rescue and care for the wounded." Furthermore, previously rival patients were now getting on 'peacefully'. (Cited in Williams, B. 2000). According to Williams, "these two serendipitous events lead to what was known as 'Tent Therapy'. Ironically the use of tent therapy became so popular in Asylums that the lawns of the hospitals also became overcrowded and the resource was abandoned until its re-emergence in the sixties as an adjunct to therapeutic interventions in psychiatric and offender populations, (Cason & Gillis, 1994).

Since then the role of outdoor pursuits and team building excursions in the countryside have become familiar facets of modern life within contexts of work, therapy and rehabilitation. Williams points out that 'along with the rise in popularity of this form of therapy, there has been an increase in research to determine its efficacy. The findings have regularly claimed that adventure therapy in a wilderness setting is a more effective option when compared to treatment provided in institutional settings' (Cason & Gillis, 1994. cited in Williams, B 2000).

Findings from studies in the adolescent sector suggest that this form of therapy is most effective with young people. In the adolescent population within institutional rehabilitation, recidivism is claimed to be as high as 65% (Pommier & Witt 1995). Studies relating to measures of recidivism are regularly quoted as evidence for the positive effects of Adventure therapy. (See Wright, 1983; Berman & Berman, 1989).

Cason & Gellis carried out a Meta analysis on the vast amount of data from adventure therapies with adolescents and were able to draw several concrete conclusions relating to the effect of this form of therapeutic intervention. The authors consolidated data relating to several aspects of personality that were considered to have been 'positively affected by the programme'.

Comparison of scales measuring Self Esteem, Locus of Control, Attitudes, Grades and Clinical scales revealed that the strongest positive effect on participants was evidenced in their changed clinical scores measuring depression and anxiety. Furthermore the study showed that the longer the therapy programme, the more positive the results were, (Cason & Gillis 1994).

Williams, (2000) claims that 'the literature is consistent in demonstrating that adventure therapy is more effective than the institutional methods of treating adolescents' and poses the next question which is 'what is it that makes it a more effective approach? Kerr & Glass (1987), suggest that the answer lies within the 'realm of group dynamics.' However Williams suggests that "because the processes and stages of group development are inherently the same in both institutional and wilderness settings, the differences in the two setting group dynamics must lie elsewhere."

Williams goes on to discuss the unique role of the wilderness setting in providing triggers and opportunities for clients to work with issues as they arise through group interaction. At the same time Williams emphasises the role of the counsellors in this setting, which differs from the normal clinical setting in a number of ways, for e.g. the counsellor contact with the group members is extended from the normal 'clinical counselling hour'. Furthermore clients are given the opportunity for experiential learning through observing the counsellors interacting with group members as issues occur spontaneously.

To illustrate the setting differences further, observations are drawn from a different population, taken from a recurring programme for women, based in a wilderness setting. Over a period of 6 years, Margaret Kessel, Clinical Social Worker, lead several groups of women through an experiential programme, which included dance and Yoga therapy, meditation and a four day rock climb. The women attending presented with a wide range of mental health problems, including; major depression; dysthymia; anxiety; and adjustment disorder.

Long term follow up of the group members, suggested that this had been an 'ignition experience leading to higher self esteem, healthier coping strategies a sense of control over their lives and a stronger connectedness with other women', for many. (Kessel, M. 1994).